Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 1446717" data-attributes="member: 2067">Only if the fighter adds nothing to his Con, and the Savant adds everything to his.....in which case, he's no worse than a Wizard who does the same, really, so more points to 'em. He won't suck at spellcasting or hitpoints or Fort save, probably, but a Wizzy who ups his Int like that won't suck at spellcasting or skillpoints or Knowledge checks...*shrug* I've got not real problem with it. A Savant is almost as untouchable as a Monk....whoopee? That's not exactly going to ruin my plans as a DM, here, and it's not going to be any reason to choose Savant over Fighter, since they get different tricks (if you want to be able to swing a sword with any effectiveness, rather than just be immune to sword swings, y'know...), and it makes the Savant/Fighter an appealing possibility, which I adore.....while a default PsiHB Savant/Fighter would utterly blow, which I dislike.I mean, basically, Savant = Uberdefender. I've got no problems with this niche being served, and see no reason why it's overpowered, because it still offers a difficult choice....not nessecarily between what ability score to increase at any given level, but for a spellcaster, that's not really a difficult choice anyway; but it is a difficult choice between being able to take damage like the party's barbarian, or being able to deal....any....damage.....which a Savant with a Con like that will suck donkeys at.Yeah, but if the guy who's fast enough to break the mystical barriers of time and space with speed can't go first in the initiative order, it's going to deal a serious blow to verisimilitude.....the dude who can defy gravity with his agility can't dodge a Fireball? WTFBBQ?Well, this is why they're house rules....I'd hope that WotC would be able to give a nod toward needing a decent Con to manifest defensive powers, for instance, but if they don't, it's up to me. If they do, then I'll probably go with their rules, since I usually assume they know better than me unless shown otherwise. Them destroying the physical and multi-mental aspect of the psion would pretty much show me otherwise, for my campaign.As for the spells, I'll give 'em to ya, but they hinge on the same idea as Polymorph -- that the spells you prepare are integral to your fleshy body, not just your mind. You 'wear' the prepared spells, and if you change bodies, they don't go with you.Magic Jar: spells and spell-like abilties stay with the form that has them. However, you still need the requisite DC-basing score to use them. So if you take the body of a harpy, you can use the Captivating Song as long as you have a Charisma of 13 (I reverse-engineer the "spell level" from the DC + modifier. Usually it's just 1/2 the HD). If you become a Dryad, you can use deep slumber if you have a Wisdom of 13. If you become a huge viper snake, you can use poison if your Con is at least 13 (which it will be, since your Con turns to the level of the Viper's with MJ).The other two will depend upon how the revised psionic rules change them, but tentatively:Mind Switch: It's basically Magic Jar, so same case. But the one you switched with would possibly be able to use your abilities...Psychofeedback: With the 3.5 changes to buffs, this will probably be changed, too, but I'd (a) make a mental version and (b) just say these don't apply to spell DC's, kinda like how Eagle's Splendor et al work.With that kind of rule in place (basically, your spells stay with your body), I can't see too much of a problem with it.</blockquote>

Verification